RAH buys up 80 C-Series
02-25-2010, 01:36 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: 319/320/321...whatever it takes.
Posts: 492
The CS300 will help us dramatically reduce our fuel consumption and impact on the environment. Our customers will also appreciate the generous amount of personal space with wider aisles, increased shoulder room, improved storage bins and extra-large windows,” Bedford added.
I don't think it's bigger than an F9 airbus.
Honest question-- did the pilots go with it too?
I don't think it's bigger than an F9 airbus.
Honest question-- did the pilots go with it too?
02-25-2010, 01:39 PM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
NWA simply purchased the cert of a defunct airline. Independence Air didn't become Compass. Although many ACA/I-Air people went from there to Compass. But there were still many hurdles to overcome, mainly trying to get a new fleet type added to an existing cert, as well as the fact that it's a new operation as far as the feds are concerned. But that process is easier than just starting a whole "new" airline.
As a side note, DAL purchased the original ACJet certificate from ACAI Corp, for what reason, who knows. May have had to do with them being the ones that cancelled the DCI contract and a cost they would be legally obligated to absorb per the agreement. Just like the leases on the FRJ's that sat idle in MYR after they were parked.
02-25-2010, 01:43 PM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Nope, see above. I-Air was a dead/tango uniform airline at that point with the only employees being the administrative record custodian types.
Although some did go on to help with the start up of Compass.
However, had I-Air been still operating, there was buyout/successorship language in the CBA that dictated the pilots would go with cert/planes in that scenario had it happened that way.
Although some did go on to help with the start up of Compass.
However, had I-Air been still operating, there was buyout/successorship language in the CBA that dictated the pilots would go with cert/planes in that scenario had it happened that way.
02-25-2010, 01:46 PM
#84
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,609
Guys:
FIVE YEARS.
These airplanes will not even begin deliveries until Q2'2015, and that's assuming Bombardier certifies the damn thing on schedule!
Let not your panties get in a twist about RAH's existing payrates with regards to these aircraft set to arrive a HALF DECADE from now.
FIVE YEARS.
These airplanes will not even begin deliveries until Q2'2015, and that's assuming Bombardier certifies the damn thing on schedule!
Let not your panties get in a twist about RAH's existing payrates with regards to these aircraft set to arrive a HALF DECADE from now.
02-25-2010, 01:49 PM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Guys:
FIVE YEARS.
These airplanes will not even begin deliveries until Q2'2015, and that's assuming Bombardier certifies the damn thing on schedule!
Let not your panties get in a twist about RAH's existing payrates with regards to these aircraft set to arrive a HALF DECADE from now.
FIVE YEARS.
These airplanes will not even begin deliveries until Q2'2015, and that's assuming Bombardier certifies the damn thing on schedule!
Let not your panties get in a twist about RAH's existing payrates with regards to these aircraft set to arrive a HALF DECADE from now.
I wonder, if somebody with details of RAH's CBA can chime in whether or not it contains language of how/when pay rates will be established for new fleet types?
02-25-2010, 01:53 PM
#86
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,609
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I wonder, if somebody with details of RAH's CBA can chime in whether or not it contains language of how/when pay rates will be established for new fleet types?
ARTICLE 21
NEW AIRCRAFT
Should the Company announce its intent to place into revenue service aircraft
other than aircraft for which rates are specified in this Agreement, the rates for that aircraft will be determined as follows:
1. The Company will give the Union notice of its intent to introduce the new
equipment at least six (6) months prior to the estimated scheduled
revenue service date, or within thirty (30) days after entering into the
contract for procurement or lease of the new aircraft type, whichever is
later in time.
2. The parties will meet within (15) days following written request by either
party to negotiate rates of pay for such aircraft type. Should negotiations
result in an agreement, the new aircraft type will be flown in accordance
with the terms of the agreement. If negotiations do not result in an
agreement within one hundred (100) days from the date of
commencement of negotiations, either party may submit the dispute to
final and binding interest arbitration.
3. The dispute shall be heard before an arbitrator selected in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Article 18 (Resolution of Disputes).
4. The Hearing will be conducted as soon as possible but in no event more
than three (3) months after arbitrator selection, unless mutually agreed
otherwise. Briefing by the parties, if any, will be completed within thirty
(30) days after the hearing date. The arbitrator shall issue a decision no
later than sixty (60) days after the close of the hearing or of receipt of the
parties brief, whichever is later.
5. Upon final agreement, or issuance of the arbitrators decision, as the case
may be, retroactive compensation, if applicable, will be paid to all pilots
who operate a disputed aircraft type placed in revenue service before the
parties’ agreement became effective or the award issued.
6. Nothing set forth in this Article shall prevent the Company from introducing
a new aircraft type into revenue service before agreement is reached over
the rates applicable to that aircraft, as long as the pay rates assigned to
such aircraft type are not less than the rates provided by this Article or the
principal Agreement for aircraft with similar power plant (turboprop or jet)
and seat range that either includes the number of seats in the new aircraft
type or has a seat range not greater than the number seats in the disputed
aircraft. If the aircraft is smaller (less seats) than any other aircraft for
which pay scales have been established by this Agreement then, subject
to the provisions of this article, the Company will establish a rate for the
new aircraft until a negotiated rate has been agreed to by the parties. The
negotiated rate will be retroactive to the implementation of the new aircraft
type.
NEW AIRCRAFT
Should the Company announce its intent to place into revenue service aircraft
other than aircraft for which rates are specified in this Agreement, the rates for that aircraft will be determined as follows:
1. The Company will give the Union notice of its intent to introduce the new
equipment at least six (6) months prior to the estimated scheduled
revenue service date, or within thirty (30) days after entering into the
contract for procurement or lease of the new aircraft type, whichever is
later in time.
2. The parties will meet within (15) days following written request by either
party to negotiate rates of pay for such aircraft type. Should negotiations
result in an agreement, the new aircraft type will be flown in accordance
with the terms of the agreement. If negotiations do not result in an
agreement within one hundred (100) days from the date of
commencement of negotiations, either party may submit the dispute to
final and binding interest arbitration.
3. The dispute shall be heard before an arbitrator selected in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Article 18 (Resolution of Disputes).
4. The Hearing will be conducted as soon as possible but in no event more
than three (3) months after arbitrator selection, unless mutually agreed
otherwise. Briefing by the parties, if any, will be completed within thirty
(30) days after the hearing date. The arbitrator shall issue a decision no
later than sixty (60) days after the close of the hearing or of receipt of the
parties brief, whichever is later.
5. Upon final agreement, or issuance of the arbitrators decision, as the case
may be, retroactive compensation, if applicable, will be paid to all pilots
who operate a disputed aircraft type placed in revenue service before the
parties’ agreement became effective or the award issued.
6. Nothing set forth in this Article shall prevent the Company from introducing
a new aircraft type into revenue service before agreement is reached over
the rates applicable to that aircraft, as long as the pay rates assigned to
such aircraft type are not less than the rates provided by this Article or the
principal Agreement for aircraft with similar power plant (turboprop or jet)
and seat range that either includes the number of seats in the new aircraft
type or has a seat range not greater than the number seats in the disputed
aircraft. If the aircraft is smaller (less seats) than any other aircraft for
which pay scales have been established by this Agreement then, subject
to the provisions of this article, the Company will establish a rate for the
new aircraft until a negotiated rate has been agreed to by the parties. The
negotiated rate will be retroactive to the implementation of the new aircraft
type.
02-25-2010, 01:56 PM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: ERJ FO
Posts: 1,276
evidently you're not very familiar with DAL's scope right now. The damage has already been done here at DAL and the number of "large rj's" is capped and maxed out right now, thus no "growth" at least for DAL. Also the codeshares are actually pretty strict with us so far. For instance the YX codeshare only allows YX to codeshare their passengers on us. Delta cant sell tickets and codeshare our passengers on YX so it boosts our loads through that codeshare.
wipe your chin, the drool is starting to drip
wipe your chin, the drool is starting to drip
02-25-2010, 02:07 PM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: awkward
Posts: 239
If they can't reach an agreement in the next five years under their Article 21, they can just MEL 39 seatbelts.
02-25-2010, 02:07 PM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
02-25-2010, 02:11 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: MD80
Posts: 1,111
I've come to realize that most of the people on here are hypocrites or communists. Personally, I don't care what you think of my pay rate. I'm the one who has to live with it. And am I happy RAH placed this order? Absolutely! I hope this puts RAH in a position to directly compete with your company (whoever it may be) and take as much business as possible away from your company. Why? Because that's the way it goes. You can't live in a free-market economy and complain that the other guy is too competitive. And while everyone sits around and complains about how "unfair" it is that RAH does what it does, I'm going to sit around and hope they continue to be good at it. For those of you that wistfully dream of the days when things were better; I suggest you wake up quickly cuz you're going to dream your way into unemployment.
No, I don't care about your pension, your lost wages, your hardships. Just as I would not expect you to care about mine. I don't come on here and whine, cry, and sulk when a company gets awarded flying over mine, when a company does better financially then mine, or when something good happens to another company and not mine. Yet, you all do this to RAH. What are you expecting the company to do? Hand you guys a few contracts and say "Hey, we're sorry...you guys go ahead and take this one. We're making enough money as it is and wouldn't want to hurt your feelings or make you think it's unfair!" Am I supposed to apologize because my company (for the time being - and it's sketchy) is trying to be somewhat successful? Cuz I'm not.
I don't work here with the wool pulled over my eyes thinking I'm going to make $150K in the right seat. I know almost exactly what I'm getting. A confrontational and usually back-handed management team that would just as soon hit me with their car as sign my paycheck. But so long as they're a SUCCESSFUL confrontational and back-handed management team, I will hang. Call me a scab, selfish, or any other derogatory word you want. But after you do it, don't ask for my help in raising the bar at your company. Raise your own bar and stop blaming me for your shortfalls. I don't blame you for mine.
No, I don't care about your pension, your lost wages, your hardships. Just as I would not expect you to care about mine. I don't come on here and whine, cry, and sulk when a company gets awarded flying over mine, when a company does better financially then mine, or when something good happens to another company and not mine. Yet, you all do this to RAH. What are you expecting the company to do? Hand you guys a few contracts and say "Hey, we're sorry...you guys go ahead and take this one. We're making enough money as it is and wouldn't want to hurt your feelings or make you think it's unfair!" Am I supposed to apologize because my company (for the time being - and it's sketchy) is trying to be somewhat successful? Cuz I'm not.
I don't work here with the wool pulled over my eyes thinking I'm going to make $150K in the right seat. I know almost exactly what I'm getting. A confrontational and usually back-handed management team that would just as soon hit me with their car as sign my paycheck. But so long as they're a SUCCESSFUL confrontational and back-handed management team, I will hang. Call me a scab, selfish, or any other derogatory word you want. But after you do it, don't ask for my help in raising the bar at your company. Raise your own bar and stop blaming me for your shortfalls. I don't blame you for mine.
By the way I think what RAH is doing is a major gamble that may cost them a lot in the future considering it's a matter of time before they start competing with their contract carriers if they haven't already. And there is no way that they can win over Southwest, Airtran and the rest of them. Or when United, Delta, Airways start demanding that's its either for them or on their own. Maybe god really did speak to their CEO.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
